Re: Operator overloading?

On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 9:08:43 +0000, Gerry Jackson wrote:
[..]

111 value x x . 111  ok
222 to cr .( Does TO parse? ) x x 222 = [if] .( No it doesn't!) [then]
Does TO parse? No it doesn't! ok

[..]
As does iForth.

You could argue that it's not a standard program because it contains a
deliberate ambiguous condition so a parsing TO would fail in some way
but it does demonstrate non-compliant behaviour.

  222 TO cr
should (I hope!) produce an exception (unless CR is redefined),
so this *definitely* fails and doesn't even finish the test.
I'm not sure that you can use a buggy program to test for an ambiguous
condition (looks like a top job for an eager lawyer). It would be
much better if the anomaly can be shown with a valid program. What's
the damage when a intentionally erroneous piece of code fails?
Also note that this program's output is correct on Vfx and fails with
an exception on compliant Forths :--)
-marcel